Well, as was stated over and over last season and this, if the running is more effective BB has said he will do it more. Common sense.

This year's 11th best running is clearly more effective than last year's 24th best running, so we have done more of it, just like BB said we would.

So we are running the ball 6 times more a game this year, or about 1-2 times more per quarter. The .3 ypc more we have gained this season has been effective enough to justify running it somewhat more. Though it should be noted we are passing just as much as last season (~ 38 per game).

wait a min... I was told that an extra 1-2 carries a quarter wouldn't make any difference and that .3ypc extra isn't a huge help that we need 1-2ypc more... and that the O would suffer if you took the ball out of Brady's hands instead of commiting to a running game esp if it didn't produce immediate results

Are you telling me that balance is actually improving the team? BTW, you wouldn't happen to think that the extra .3ypc could be coming from commiting to the run and mixing up the play calling instead of being so predictable that last year even my mother knew when they were running do you?

wait a min... I was told that an extra 1-2 carries a quarter wouldn't make any difference and that .3ypc extra isn't a huge help that we need 1-2ypc more... and that the O would suffer if you took the ball out of Brady's hands instead of commiting to a running game esp if it didn't produce immediate results

Are you telling me that balance is actually improving the team? BTW, you wouldn't happen to think that the extra .3ypc could be coming from commiting to the run and mixing up the play calling instead of being so predictable that last year even my mother knew when they were running do you?

You weren't told any of that. So you are lying, as usual.

You weren't told we needed 6 ypc.

You weren't told there was any problem with running 1-2 times more a quarter.

Ridley as lead back getting 4.6 ypc compared to Benny as lead back getting 3.7 ypc explains the modest increase in running frequency quite clearly.

wait a min... I was told that an extra 1-2 carries a quarter wouldn't make any difference and that .3ypc extra isn't a huge help that we need 1-2ypc more... and that the O would suffer if you took the ball out of Brady's hands instead of commiting to a running game esp if it didn't produce immediate results

Are you telling me that balance is actually improving the team? BTW, you wouldn't happen to think that the extra .3ypc could be coming from commiting to the run and mixing up the play calling instead of being so predictable that last year even my mother knew when they were running do you?

You weren't told any of that. So you are lying, as usual.

You weren't told we needed 6 ypc.

You weren't told there was any problem with running 1-2 times more a quarter.

Ridley as lead back getting 4.6 ypc compared to Benny as lead back getting 3.7 ypc explains the modest increase in running frequency quite clearly.

You are right. And part of the reason we are getting higher averages is because Ridley and Woodhead and now Vereen can turn a 3 yard run into a 10 to 20 yard run ... or more! Whereas the consistent and dependable Green-Ellis could turn a 3 yard run into a 6 yard run.

Being able to put some threat behind running the ball helps the passing game even if we do not run the ball more. But taking advantage of a D whose personnel packages are stacked to stop the pass is clearly the smart thing to do. And when you have healthy TEs and use 2 at a time so much the better!

I will add that being able to throws safety valve, swing, screens etc to the RBs also helps the rest of the passing game ... as well as the running game as keeping a D honest takes away any edge they are wanting to leverage.

I guess this pedestrian O (as per Billick) - outside of Brady - gets more yards per walk than those joggers and runners on most teams.

I did notice that when Law Firm has a 19 rush 129 yard game this week the forum's anti-rushing league decides to skip their weekly "Law Firm watch" thread... fitting.

Years ago when Law Firm was averaging 4+ yards a carry for us people weren't telling us that when we ran better we'd run more; they were telling us that running was unnecessary, a thing of the past, that our offensive line wasn't made to run block, that we were better leaving the ball in our best player's hands, that we couldn't run because we didnt possess a deep receiving threat so we couldn't run... there were a thousand reasons why O'Brien didn't run.

McDaniel's comes in, signs 6 or more tightends/fullbacks/Hbacks to the roster, brings balance back to an imperfect, predictable, pass only attack and what happens?

Brady's most efficient year, the NFL's most potent offense, breaking records... The thing the anti-running league will never be able to quanitify is the effect of play action, Brady hasn't been sacked or intercepted in a long long time and the reason for our wild success on offense and improved play on defense is play action and balance.

Many of us have been saying this for years, most since 2009 after Josh left... you all argued against it because we had an amazing fantasy league offense so it fit your needs.

Bring on the revisionist history where you tell us this was what we needed all along... brilliant.

Brady's most efficient year, the NFL's most potent offense, breaking records... The thing the anti-running league will never be able to quanitify is the effect of play action, Brady hasn't been sacked or intercepted in a long long time and the reason for our wild success on offense and improved play on defense is play action and balance.

So, you're telling us Brady's low interception rate is due to running 1-2 times more per quarter?

Bring on the revisionist history where you tell us this was what we needed all along... brilliant.

I don't see any revisionist history here. BB said he would run more if it was more effective. It has been more effective. We have run 1-2 times a quarter more. That's exactly what people were saying all along. They will run more if it's more effective.

Ridley's 4.6 ypc compared to Benny's 3.7 ypc is clearly more efficient running from the lead back. So Ridley has gotten more carries with 5 games left than Benny had all last season.

Ridely's average is exactly the same as Law Firms when he played for us in 2010...

The difference now is more tightends, fullback play and commitment; in short better game planning and play calling.

Comparing Law Firm on the Bungles is apples and oranges but you'd never let that get in the way of making another ridiculous point.

When you admit that balance is a good thing we can talk again. Backtracking and revising history is a lot easier than admitting you were wrong but then again I can't remember the pass happy contingent ever admitting they were wrong... even as we're hoisting the next Lombardi it will all be Brady's doing.

Hard to prove that running 1-2 times more a quarter is affecting the interception rate significantly.

But it does seem feasible that the lead back getting nearly a yard more per carry could be perceived as more of a threat by the opposing D and open it up for the pass (with play action brandishing that threat), plus ot would put you in less 3rd and long, interception prone situations.

Ridely's average is exactly the same as Law Firms when he played for us in 2010...

The difference now is more tightends, fullback play and commitment; in short better game planning and play calling.

Comparing Law Firm on the Bungles is apples and oranges but you'd never let that get in the way of making another ridiculous point.

When you admit that balance is a good thing we can talk again. Backtracking and revising history is a lot easier than admitting you were wrong but then again I can't remember the pass happy contingent ever admitting they were wrong... even as we're hoisting the next Lombardi it will all be Brady's doing.

Ridely's average is exactly the same as Law Firms when he played for us in 2010...

The difference now is more tightends, fullback play and commitment; in short better game planning and play calling.

Comparing Law Firm on the Bungles is apples and oranges but you'd never let that get in the way of making another ridiculous point.

When you admit that balance is a good thing we can talk again. Backtracking and revising history is a lot easier than admitting you were wrong but then again I can't remember the pass happy contingent ever admitting they were wrong... even as we're hoisting the next Lombardi it will all be Brady's doing.

Have you ever admitted you were wrong wozzy?

Numerous times... every time... that's the difference between myself and many posters.

Ridely's average is exactly the same as Law Firms when he played for us in 2010...

The difference now is more tightends, fullback play and commitment; in short better game planning and play calling.

Comparing Law Firm on the Bungles is apples and oranges but you'd never let that get in the way of making another ridiculous point.

When you admit that balance is a good thing we can talk again. Backtracking and revising history is a lot easier than admitting you were wrong but then again I can't remember the pass happy contingent ever admitting they were wrong... even as we're hoisting the next Lombardi it will all be Brady's doing.

Have you ever admitted you were wrong wozzy?

Numerous times... every time... that's the difference between myself and many posters.

Such as?

I do recall myself admitting I was wrong when I said BB was an average GM. Of course my reward for that admission was Rusty useing that to try and say I am always wrong.

Again way to deflect from the obvious... The Bungles sux. When Ridley gets traded to the Jaguars and has to run behind that horrid offensive line, lets make comparisons.

The thing you don't get, will never understand is that football is a team sport. To you quarterback play happens on an island, runningback play happens on an island, wide receiver play happens on an island... it's an affliction commonly referred to as "fantasy football-itis."

Too much Colin Cowherd, too much fantasy football stats... go watch some nameless highschool team play, watch how all of their players success or failure depends on the players and schemes around them.

Forget us for a moment, yesterday all the analyst I heard kept saying Green Bay is in real trouble because they have terrible running game. With depleted O-Line, last thing they should be doing is dropping back to pass. Just too predictable, the D-Line just forgets about the Play Action, and just goes after Rodgers. Again you dont worry about decimals in the running game, its about deception, and confusion, to allow the Passing game to succeed. It gives time to the QB.

Also a good Passing attack helps the running game, Complimentary Football.

Very similar to our plight last year. You can run more to keep them honest against the pass, but if it's ineffective running that isn't going to do much good.

The Packers runners are much like our lead back was last season. Averaging well under 4 ypc just doesn't cause the opposing D much concern and they can concentrate on the pass and tee off with the rush.

He has a better grasp of the playbook, the philosophy of the Ernhardt-Perkins offensive system and how the run sets up the pass, he has a substantially better grasp of a nuanced running game that uses counters, reverses, off tackle and multiple looks to be succesful. I know you're not a fan of running so this will all be lost on you...

Obie was predictable, only ran the sweep play or draw in the run game, and when he got behind he left it to Tom Brady to solve which usually resulted in his getting sacked 5-6 times a playoff game.

I'm sure the rest of the pass happy contingent will as well. I welcome your attempts at telling us why 2007 and this year's offense, both of which were balanced, is a result of Tom Brady just being dialed in while the running game plays no part in it.